Democratic state Sen. Ethan Strimling is preparing to introduce legislation to support Net neutrality- a concept that seeks to protect the free market of the Internet from prohibitive-tiered pricing schemes by the corporations that control it. Strimling’s legislation comes at a pivotal time, as the national political equilibrium has been jarred in the last several elections by the emergence of online media. The use of blogs, social networking, and other technologically progressive means of message distribution has allowed a larger number of voices to be heard by elected officials, and it has allowed tech-savvy candidates to distribute their message to a much broader audience for far less money than ever before. The Maine political scene is just now awakening to the need to compete in this realm, and the slow start by both sides has resulted in two parties increasingly focused on making up for lost time. This is a very positive development for the citizens of Maine, and it underscores the necessity of a free and open Internet to the continuing evolution of political and social dialogue.

The concept of Net neutrality has been chalked up to an obscure left versus right debate on the national stage, but the implications of the recent lapse in the federal government’s protection of the Internet as an open network are specifically pertinent to Maine’s fight for a viable economic future. Maine’s successful emergence from the shadow of a crumbling factory- and natural resource-based economy is predicated on its ability to compete in the digital marketplace. The promise of the Internet economy for Maine is the ability to offer products and services that can be distributed without regard to locality and that create jobs without compromising the social and environmental uniqueness of our state. This promise is reliant not only on an open Internet, but also on the free exchange and debate that an open Internet encourages.

The possibility exists today that the dialogue both parties are engaging in with their constituents via the Internet could be dramatically influenced by the decisions of large corporations that control Internet access. This means that the Maine GOP’s recent YouTube programming to educate citizens on their education proposals, or the Maine Democrats’ recent attempts to engage a younger demographic through the popular social network MySpace, could both face arbitrary cost barriers based on the fickle whims of telecom corporate leaders. The potential result is a stifled debate on the issues that most profoundly affect the voters of Maine. Or, an even more alarming prospect: deliberately imposed costs meant to reduce the effectiveness of a particular group’s message.

We have already seen indications that telecom companies will use the advantage of carrier status to inhibit competition for their other market ventures: In Maine, smaller Internet service providers have been restricted access to cable television advertising by the cable companies that provide competing products. Now extrapolate that logic out to the political realm: Why would a telecom company allow its Internet backbone to be used by public interest groups or citizens whose efforts may result in legislation that becomes restrictive to the telecom’s goals? While it is unlikely this type of communication would be restricted altogether, the lack of Net neutrality allows a company to impose financial barriers to message resonance that can and does have a specific influence on the marketplace of ideas.

Telecommunication companies that oppose the concept of Net neutrality are not free-market martyrs facing the socialization of their assets, as some claim. The United States taxpayer has subsidized the telecommunications infrastructure of this nation for almost 100 years and continues to do so through taxes on Internet and phone service at state and federal levels. The codification of Net neutrality is not an imposition on the private holdings of private citizens, but rather the formal preservation of a free market environment on lines of communication that have been considered open to American citizens since the day they were strung from the poles.

The Maine legislature has an opportunity to help ensure the continued evolution of productive dialogue in this state. Sen. Strimling’s proposed Internet Freedom Preservation Act seeks to preserve the potential of the free market for Maine’s economy as we move further into the digital age. Moves by both political parties to embrace emerging online trends should indicate that the bill will be supported across the political spectrum. Unfortunately there is a great deal of twisted rhetoric out of Washington that has caused conservative legislators to be squeamish about this issue.

A closer look at the reality of Net neutrality shows that it touches core principals valued by both sides: it preserves the sanctity of an open economy by prohibiting the undue influence of government-subsidized infrastructure owners, and it allows for more egalitarian access to the now-dominant information distribution channels.

I urge the citizens of Maine to contact their legislators and tell them to stand up for the preservation of free-market standards for Maine’s information highway by supporting Net neutrality legislation.

Lance Dutson is the owner of Maine Coast Design, a new media-marketing firm in Searsmont, and publisher of MaineWebReport.com. He is also a contributor to MaineInternetFreedom.com .